Sunday, September 5, 2010

Keshava Baliram Hedgewar (April 1, 1889 – June 21, 1940) was the founder of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Hedgewar founded the RSS in Nagpur, Maharashtra in 1925, with the intention of promoting the concept of the Hindu nation. Hedgewar drew upon influences from social and spiritual Hindu reformers such as Swami Vivekananda, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and Aurobindo to develop the core philosophy of the RSS.

He went to Kolkata to pursue a Degree in Medicine. After successful completion, Hedgewar was drawn into the influence of secret revolutionary organisations like the Anushilan Samiti and Jugantar in Bengal.

He was also a member of the Hindu Mahasabha till 1929. Hedgewar was imprisoned for sedition by the British government in 1921 for a year and again in 1930 for nine months. After his spell in prison he instructed the RSS to remain aloof from political activities including the Salt Satyagraha (1930) and continue mainly as a social organisation.

Dr. Hedgewar regarded independence and national unity as complimentary, like two sides of the same coin. Therefore, even after embarking upon the work for national unity he did not abandon working for independence. In the year 1928, he took part in the Congress convention held in Calcutta. There he discussed about the Sangh mission and about the national situation with Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose. Both the leaders exchanged views on the number of subjects concerning the Indian nation and appreciated each others point of view.

In the year 1930 in its Lahore convention. Congress declared "full freedom" as its objective. Dr. Hedgewar was naturally delighted at this.http://kvpuniverse.org/About%20Dr.html

Hedgewar as a medical student in Calcutta had been part of the revolutionary activities of the Anushilan Samiti and Jugantar. (Chitkara M G, Hindutva, Published by APH Publishing, 1997 ISBN 8170247985, 9788170247982)

He was charged with sedition in 1921 by the British Administration and served a year in prison. He was briefly a member of Indian National Congress. In 1925, he left the Congress to form the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, which would become the focal point of Hindu movements in Independent India. After the formation of the RSS too, Hedgewar was to take part in the Indian National Congress led movements against the British rule. He joined the Jungle Satyagraha agitation in 1931 and served a second term in prison. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh started by him became one of the most prominent Hindu organization with its influence ranging in the social and political spheres of India.

Hedgewar's political career begins from 1905 and ends with his death in 1940. In the first phase (1905 - 1918) of his political life, he was 'an unalloyed Tilakite. Maharashtra witnessed two simultaneous lines in the public life one, propagated by Agarkar, emphasised the necessity of social radicalism as precondition of political change. But, Tilak emphasised on political activities as the first priority. Hedgewar endorsed Tilak's approach.Pandurao's Khankhaje, leader of Swadesh Bandhav, a revolutionary organisation, wrote in Kesari, "Hedgewar and the other young men were in the forefront of Swadeshi propaganda and delivering speeches". After joining National Medical College in Calcutta in 1910 with the sole aim to participate in revolutionary activities, he became active member of "Anushilan Samiti" with his code name "Koken". He was closely associated with revolutionaries like Nalini Kishor Guha (who provides authentic account of Hedgewar's revolutionary activities in Calcutta during his stay from 1910 - 1916). After his return from Calcutta to Nagpur, he used his contacts to organise revolutionaries with a plan of "armed revolt" which, according to P.L. Joshi (in his article "Mobilisation in Vidharba by Tilak in political thought and leadership of Tilak" edited by N.R. Inamdar P.370) was dropped on the advice of Tilak. Hedgewar's revolutionary group was the biggest one and consisted of 150 hard core revolutionaries. G.M. Huddar says Hedgewar's revolutionary group resembled a secret "conspiratorial group" of young men. (G.M. Huddar in -RSS and Netaji in the Illustrated Weekly of India, Oct. 7,1 1979). His plan of armed revolt was not an isolated case of adventurism but it was coincided by his manifesto for Indians Independence which was to be declared from many countries. He postponed his plan on the advise of Dr B. S. Moonje. (Hedgewar's role in freedom struggle - Indian Express, Rakesh Sinha - 24 June 1996)

Savarkar-Bose Meet

A meeting which took place between Bose and Savarkar in Bombay in June 1940. On this occasion Savarkar is supposed to have suggested to Subhas that he should go to Europe and seek the dictators’ support. According to a article in the Times of India of June 24, Mr Bose had also talks with Mr V D Savarkar, president of the All India Hindu Mahasabha, at the latter’s residence at Dadar on Saturday evening. It is understood that the discussions related to the present political situation in the country and the steps the Hindu Mahasabha and the ‘Forward Bloc’ should take in co-operation with other parties. The episode, as always, did not go unnoticed by the police, who gave a brief account of it:Subhas Chandra Bose arrived in Bombay on June 22nd and had discussions with V D Savarkar with a view of exploring the possibilities of co-operation between the Forward Bloc and the Hindu Mahasabha respectively. (MSA, Home Special Department, 1023, 1939-40, SA dated June 29, 1940, ‘Forward Bloc’).

The absence of accounts by the Hindu Mahasabha on the meeting can be explained by the fact that, both the leaders being involved in anti-British activities, it would not make sense leaving records of sensitive matters. Not even among Bose’s papers and writings is there any reference to the meeting. It is therefore impossible to reconstruct the content of the talks between the two leaders, unless we trust the only source available. This is the speech made by Savarkar on the occasion of the dissolution of the Abhinav Bharat in 1952. Certainly the meeting did take place, and very possibly the two leaders discussed Bose’s intention to go to Europe and seek the support of the axis powers. Savarkar inspired Bose, who, right from 1933, had his own connections with the dictators’ governments. The working committee of September 10 decided which steps should be taken in order to prepare the nation to face the emergency provoked by the outbreak of the war.

The preliminary condition was the devolution of full powers to a central Indian government by the British. The committee wished for the realization of the militarisation of Indian society and the Indianisation of the army. It requested a reform of the Arms Act, along the lines prevailing in the UK. It demanded also that territorial forces and paramilitary groups be strengthened, that new military organisations be created in those provinces where they did not exist before.(NMML, Moonje papers, subject files, n 51).

A study of relations between two towering contemporaries Veer Savarkar (1883-1966) and Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose (1897-1945?) will prove interesting. On the "longest day," June 21, 1940, Subhas Chandra Bose called on to Savarkar at Savarkar Sadan, Bombay. Savarkar advised Subhas not to waste time in agitating for the removal of British statues like Holwell Monument in Calcutta - only to end up in a British prison during the invaluable war-time. Savarkar, was surreptitiously in touch with Rash Behari Bose in Japan. He advocated that Subhas should smuggle himself out of the country and try to reach Germany and Japan (like Indian revolutionaries duri ng World War I) to raise an Indian Army of liberation out of PoWs. In his avatar as Netaji, Subhas Bose's future course of action developed on the prophetic lines of Veer Savarkar.

Netaji in his speech on Azad Hind Radio (June 25, 1944) acknowledged Savarkar's perspicacity in these words: "When due to misguided political whims and lack of vision, almost all the leaders of Congress party have been decrying all the soldiers in Indian Army as mercenaries, it is heartening to know that Veer Savarkar is fearlessly exhorting the youths of India to enlist in armed forces. These enlisted youths themselves provide us with trained men and soldiers for our Indian National Army."

On September 30, 1943 when Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose toured Andaman as the supreme commander of Azad Hind Fauz, he paid his tributes to the memories of freedom fighters imprisoned in the Cellular Jail. He got printed thousands of copies of the Tamil version of Savarkar's Indian War of Independence of 1857 and distributed them in public. Andaman and Nicobar islands were re-named as Saheed and Swaraj islands.

Savarkar reciprocated these noble sentiments, but alas, Subhas was not there to see it. On May 10, 11, and 12 1952 during the dissolution celebration of Abhinav Bharat, the secret revolutionary party Savarkar had founded in 1904 at Pune, the bust of Netaji graced the stage for three days. Hailing Subhas as "deathless" Savarkar said, "Long live deathless Subhas, victory to the goddess of freedom."

Yet, having said all that, in the end, I can't help remembering an illustrious exception. Veteran communist parliamentarian and prolific scholar Prof. Hiren Mukerjee (who years later penned a study on Netaji Subhas called Bow to the Burning Gold) on February 28, 1966, that is two days after Savarkar passed away, proposed that the Lok Sabha should pay homage to Savarkar, in recognition of his services to the nation. He was supported by U.M. Trivedi of the Jan Sangh. Prof. Hiren Mukerjee said that although Savarkar was not a member of the House, there should still be some way in which the House should register its feelings on the passing away of a great leader. The House had done so in the case of Mahatma Gandhi and Stalin who were not members of the House.

Though, ultimately the House did not formally pay any homage, by observing silence, Speaker Hukum Singh conveyed the sentiments of the House to the bereaved family through the secretary of Lok Sabha. On March 4, 1966 when Union ministers, Opposition leaders, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha paid homage to Savarkar in a condolence meet organised by Delhi's citizen's council, Prof. Hiren Mukerjee, though differing from some of Savarkar's views, had praised the potent brand of nationalism that he championed. Earlier Mukerjee was the one who had denounced All India Radio for not taking note of Savarkar's Mritunjaya Diwas celebration on December 24, 1960.

Yet given their shady history it is not unnatural that the example of Hiren Mukerjee would be lost upon the communists. (Subhas vs Savarkar, Author: Balbir K. Punj, Publication: The Asian Age - Date: May 20, 2002)Mukherjee Commission's Justice Mukherjee on Gumnami Baba/Bhagwanji being Subhashttp://indiatoday.intoday.in/site/Story/81464/IndiaIn a recent documentary film on Subhas Chandra Bose, Justice Manoj Kumar Mukherjee, who for six years investigated Netaji’s mysterious disappearance, has been shown to make an admission “off the record”. He is absolutely sure that Dasnami Sanyasi, popularly known as Bhagwanji or Gumnami Baba, who is last known to have lived at Ram Bhawan in Faizabad of Uttar Pradesh in 1985, was none other than Bose.This dichotomy of private belief and public verdict has been taken up by many people as a stick to beat his findings with. They find it difficult to accept his view. This is, however, an issue that must be addressed rationally instead of being held hostage to cherished beliefs. Justice Mukherjee’s assertion might not have any legal implications, but it certainly raises a number of critical questions. Why did he not write in his report what he believed to be the truth? What could have prevented him? Going by his report, the reason for his rejecting the possibility of the Sanyasi being Bose was the “absence of any clinching evidence.” Then how does one justify his certainty?

The answer could lie in the evidence that was produced to him and also in the way the evidence was treated by him. To be able to make sense of his conviction, it is important to understand the nature of the evidence that was produced and the way he treated it.

Handwriting & DNA

The two major categories of evidence presented to the commission were individual witness accounts and the personal belongings of the Sanyasi. This included numerous books, letters and Bose’s family photographs. The Justice Mukherjee Commission of Inquiry (JMCI) scrutinised over 2,600 such items. Among the belongings were also found a few teeth kept in a match box, which were assumed by the commission to be that of the Sanyasi. The letters were sent for handwriting analysis and the teeth for DNA test. This line of investigation ~ that is, to see whether forensic evidence corroborates witness accounts ~ can hardly be flawed. Yet another factor was the level of people who wrote to the Sanyasi. There were letters from Prafulla Ghosh (First Chief Minister of West Bengal), MS Golwalkar (Letters written by then RSS chief Sri Guruji Golwalkar highly eulogizing Bhagwanji were found showing links between Netaji & RSS - Netaji was devotee of Swami Vivekananda since childhood, and RSS also built up on ideology of Vivekanada as Guruji Golwalkar was direct disciple of Swami Akhandananda, the common disciple of Sri Ramkrishna Paramhansa like Swamiji), Leela Roy, Pabitra Mohan Roy, Forward Bloc MP & Jadavpur University Professor Samar Guha and many others.Justice Mukherjee’s observation on this part of the evidence is revealing. Apparently, there is no reason for not acting or relying upon the evidence of the last two categories of witnesses particularly of the group which had seen Netaji before 1945 and also met Bhagwanji/Gunmami Baba on a number of occasions. More so when their evidence regarding the frequent visits of some freedom-fighters, eminent politicians and former members of the INA on 23 January and during the Durga Puja is supported by the fact that letters written by Prof Samar Guha, Dr Pabitra Mohan Roy and Ms Leela Roy, were found at Ram Bhawan. But there are other formidable facts and circumstances on record which stand in the way of this commission in arriving at a conclusive finding that Bhagwanji / Gumnami Baba was none other than Netaji.These “other formidable facts and circumstances” were reports of the handwriting analysis and the DNA test. While B Lal, former examiner of questioned documents of the Government of India, and one of the foremost experts in this field demonstrated in his report that the handwritings matched, the Office of the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents and Forensic Science Laboratory, Government of West Bengal, Kolkata, gave the contrary opinion, but without providing any reasoned analysis. The result of the DNA analysis was also negative.Thus, the issue was not rejected summarily by Justice Mukherjee, but he could not accept the hypothesis as majority evidence from the forensic examination did not support it.

But now that his personal view is known, it raises doubts on the veracity of the forensic evidence presented to him. Would it be surprising, in view of the muddle created in cases as recent as that of Arushi Talwar and the twin deaths at Shopian? This is a serious issue which should not be allowed to be swept under the carpet, especially when Justice Mukherjee himself highlighted in his report the series of obstacles created to impede the smooth functioning of the commission. Notably, the non-cooperative attitude of the government ~ not providing crucial documents, destruction of files, not seeking assistance from the Russian and the US governments at the highest level. These are serious lapses by any criterion.What makes these allegations serious is the shoddy argument provided by the then Home Minister in rejecting the commission’s report, and the obstinate refusal of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to disclose the records on the basis of which the commission reached its conclusions. When the Central Information Commission (CIC), in 2007, directed the MHA to disclose 220 records of the GD Khosla Comission, the ministry released only 91. It is yet to act on the CIC’s direction of 20 October 2009 to disclose all documents, listed in the JMCI report as ‘exhibits’, within twenty working days.

Justice Mukherjee’s opinion, albeit private, should be given due importance as it is not the belief of a lay person, but of an eminent criminal law expert who investigated the issue minutely. (The Statesman, Kolkata, 15 February 2010 - Resemblance & Reality: Netaji And The Godman Of Faizabad, By Chandrachur Ghose)

KGB files reveal Subhas' presence in USSR after air crash: Bose was at Stalin's mercy in 1946

By Shali Ittaman

Subhas Bose was present in the erstwhile Soviet Union in 1946! The proof lies in the high-security Paddolsk Military Archive, situated 40 km from Moscow.

Alexander Kolesnikov, a former major-general of the Warsaw Pact, who accessed these files in October 1996, says Josef Stalin, the general-secretary of the CPSU, and his cabinet were considering various options to deal with Bose in 1946. The discussion centred on the question:"Should he (Bose) be kept in Russia?"

As a member of the Institute of Oriental Studies, Moscow, Alexander Kolesnikov was permitted to visit the archive under a Indo-Russian cultural agreement. However, owing to security reasons, he was not allowed to copy the page, file number and volume of the document he had studied.

During a meeting with an Indian Parliamentary Delegation to the Russian Federation in 1996, he gave a written account of all his findings. The delegation, which included the late Chitta Basu and Sri Jayanta Roy of the Forward Bloc, brought the writing back to India.

This account is the basis of the affidavit before the Mukherjee Commission submitted by Dr Purabi Roy, a research scholar who was sent as part of Asiatic Society's three-member team to Russia to study Indian documents from 1917-1947. Since Paddolsk was out of bounds for her being a foreigner, Kolesnikov was assigned the job.

Apart from other things, the Russian account confirms the belief in various quarters that Bose had planned to shift base to Russia. Some of the related Russian documents discovered by the Asiatic team include Bose's contact with Soviet leaders seeking recognition for the Azad Hind Government and Soviet agents activities in India during and after World War II.The Soviet Spymaster's Report

The document which throws fiercer light on the events of the time, is Soviet agent Sayadyants' India papers.

Sayadyants, who lived in Bombay, was gathering India related information on "Soviet high command orders" while operating as a seller of Soviet books, periodicals and films.

His papers (MID. Fond. 0179. OPIS la. Papka ia. Delo 8, 1946) [Eng. Translation ] talk extensively about Bose, his ideology and political leanings, and his influence over the Indian masses. He implies in the papers that if the Soviets were to work with an Indian leader it almost surely would have to be Subhas Bose. Whether or not Stalin was influenced by the Sayadyants' views remains to be understood.

There is also a reference to Sayadyants' August 1946 visit to Moscow through Tehran during which he meets Soviet Ambassador to Iran I V Sadchikov. Dr Purabi Roy says, Sayadyants had mentioned to the ambassador that "he was carrying Nehru's letter to Stalin seeking the latter's support". (It is of course, historically known that Stalin neither met Nehru nor his ambassadoress Vijaylakshmi Pandit, despite the best efforts of lobbyists such as Krishna Menon).Other Indicators

Whereas Kolesnikov-Purabi Roy findings, which include various sensitive files, establish Bose's presence in Moscow, a lot of supporting evidence has come Hindustan Times' way since it began the public probe 15 days ago.

For instance, there is the testimony of Ashok Rai, a former resident of Quetta, Baluchistan, who read the Hindustan Times appeal and came forward to submit what looks to be a vital piece of information. If the testimony stands up to scrutiny, this could be the start of another research to establish how Subhas Bose reached Russia after Japan pronounced him dead on August 18, 1945.http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/Netaji/russia.htm

Sayadyants report of the political situation in IndiaGroup 'E'No. 22A brief survey of the Political situation in India"Britain Capitulates………………"Recently, there were series of articles appeared in the Indian Press informing that Lord Wavell instructed Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru to form the National Government

Nehru prepared a list of Cabinet Members, which has been approved by H.M. of English, the following are :Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru .. Prime Minister, External Affairs,Congress President.Sardar Ballav Bhai Patel .. Minister of Home Affairs, Member Of the executive committee of the Congress.Raja Gopalchari .. Finance Minister, Member of the Executive committee of the CongressSarat Chandra Bose .. Law Minister, member of the Executive committee of theCongress, brother of well known Subhas Chandra Bose

One has to admit that the economic and political situation for the functioning of the new Government is extremely unfavourable and critical……………..

First -- the problem with Muslim League with Pakistan………

Then -- the liquidation of series of defence and semi-defence organisations will be throwing jobless into streets.

There will be total unrest in commercial and industrial sectors. Agriculture has already been affected, femine is spreading from east to south. The Government must take necessary steps for the demobilisation of Indian Army.

The Maharajas and Princes in India are with independent political motivations, they rule their territories with their own political principles.

Representatives from the workers and peasants organisations are also absent in the new Government. But Congress is the most strong party in India where the people worship Gandhi as religious leader and a fanatic love for and faith on Nehru - the Indian youth is worshipping this idol. All big industrialists like Tata, Birla and others are with them.

Central Committee of Communist Party of India with its 50,000 members, having its representative in the constituent Assembly, Somnath Lahiri, who after his special visit (July 23 - August 5) took part in the extended political programme………

In India FORWARD BLOC is counter balancing Congress and Communist parties. Seven years before Subhas Chandra Bose had founded this party. This organisation cannot be called party but it is an ideal platform where all progressive people assembled together and whose main programme is to expedite the freedom movement in India and then to decide the inner political situation of the country. Before the war the organisation of Forward Bloc went underground and Subhas Bose left for Germany and later went to Japan where he formed the Indian National Army. I.N.A. soldiers used the slogans 'JAI HIND'. FOR INDIA'S FREEDOM : ENEMIES OF ENGLAND - FRIENDS OF INDIA'. After Japan's defeat the I.N.A. prisoners were brought to India for trial in Delhi.

The trial of three Officers of Indian National Army with a total success and for Forward Bloc Bose became the National leader of India. People from different walks of life has been united under the banner of militant celebrity Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.

At present active members of Forward Bloc are one hundred thousand and followers are more than the members. In the present Government there are many active workers from Forward Bloc and mainly Subhas Bose's brother Sarat Chandra Bose, who is law Minister.

V.G. SayadyantsTehran, September 1, 1946.

Stalin debates Bose's fate in 1946

Ashok Rai says that as a boy he saw Subhas Bose being taken towards a no-man's land adjoining Quetta, where the Britishers sent all hardened criminals. He says, he had a good hard look at Bose, as the Black Ford car in which the leader was travelling came to a halt outside the house where Rai stayed.

"Bose was squeezed between four uniformed men on the back seat of the car. His cap was on his lap and he looked very serious...".

Quetta was a British military base and refuelling stopover point for fighter crafts on long-distance missions. (Incidentally, Quetta, at that time, also shared borders with Russian-held territories.)

www.hindustantimes.com also has other documents which include the International Political Intelligence Report and British Intelligence reports which throw up indicators to Bose's presence in Russia.

Col. Lakshmi Sehgal deposition before the Mukherjee Commission is also important in the context. She said that in her last meeting with the Azad Hind cabinet in Mamyo, Burma, Netaji was seriously considering shifting his government's base to Russia. In fact, Hindustan Times also has Bose's letter to Soviet Ambassador in Tokyo, Jacob Malik, seeking Russia's support to force the British out of India.

UP hermit, Netaji too similar

By Anuj Dhar

Bottom: A rock marks the spot in Faizabad where the hermit was cremated. If the Faizabad account is proven it stands to bust the theory of Netaji's ashes in Renkoji Temple in Japan (Top)

There is too much in common between Bhagwanji, a hermit who died in Faizabad in 1985, and Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.

Bhagwanji sounded like him, looked like him, stood as tall, was of the same age, had similar reading habits and even had common friends. Like Bose, he too had gaps between his teeth and had a scalpel mark on his abdomen. Some rare documents, photographs and souvenirs, which reportedly belonged to the Bose family, were also found from the hermit's house.

Last fortnight, B Lal, an expert appointed by HindustanTimes.com concluded that the "writings of Bhagwanji and Netaji are of common authorship".

Now, the Mukherjee Commission, which is probing Netaji's disappearance, may order a DNA test on Bhagwanji's teeth retrieved from the latter's belongings. Officially, with that may also come the final word on the Netaji mystery. Until then, the evidence from Faizabad must speak for itself.

At the end of a July to August investigation in 2001, HindustanTimes.com had concluded that 'Netaji's death in the August 18, 1945 air crash in Taiwan was a decoy to mislead the pursuing Allied forces. After the crash story was planted with Japanese help, Netaji had probably made his way into Soviet Russia "to work with Stalin to free India". What happened hence, continued to be a mystery until the Faizabad link emerged recently.

Incidentally, Bhagwanji's life was as much a point of controversy and curious debate as was his death. His followers, who also knew him as Gumnami Baba, remember him as a secretive person; he rarely went out of his room and met people from behind a curtain.

On his death, when news spread that he was Netaji, the Uttar Pradesh High Court ordered his belongings to be sealed and sent to the Faizabad treasury. On December 22, 2001, the seals were broken for Mukherjee Commission to collect handwriting and DNA samples.

Meanwhile, HindustanTimes.com tried to find out more about the hermit. Following is the result of the investigation based on documentary and circumstantial evidence and cross-examination of witnesses.

Bhagwanji was a Bengali, who was adept at English, Hindustani, Sanskrit and German.He wore round spectacles and a round gold watch, which looked like the ones that Netaji wore. (Netaji's specs and watch were not found after his supposed death in 1945.) He treasured many rare and original pictures of Netaji's parents. (He also revered an umbrella, said to be of Netaji's father.)His followers included many of Netaji's associates, including INA Secret Service sleuth Dr Pabitra Mohan Roy, Leela Roy, Sunil Das and Trailokya Nath Chakaravarty. They kept tab on everything that was said and written on Netaji, especially his death mystery.He had a mind for matters military and often spoke of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Mountbatten as his equals. Also, partition perturbed him.Every year on January 23 (Netaji's birthday), many people, including Pabitra Mohan Roy, celebrated Bhagwanji's birthday.The original of the Khosla Commission's 1971 summons to Suresh Bose, Netaji's elder brother, was found among Bhagwanji's belongings. HindustanTimes.com also met some of Bhagwanji's associates who are under an oath of secrecy. They give the impression that he was indeed Netaji. (Netaji too was known to put his men under oath.) HindustanTimes.com also discussed its findings with experts on Netaji, including some of his family members. Most of them agreed with the inferences whereas the rest offered nothing in contradiction.

Curiously, in 1985, a few people from Faizabad met Dr Pabitra Mohan Roy in Kolkata to inform him about Bhagwanji's death. Dr Pabitra, reportedly told them: " Ami mukh khulle deshe agun lege jabe". (This country will burn if I open my mouth.)

UP hermit given secret funeral

By Anuj Dhar

Thirteen people were present when Bhagwanji of Faizabad was cremated at Guptar Ghat on the banks of River Saryu (Uttar Pradesh) on September 18, 1985. When the pyre was lit, one of them broke down and said, "…there should have been 13 lakh people here!"

Sixteen years later, a rock that marks the spot scream for attention from the middle of a wild vegetation. On its face someone has painted in an unsteady hand, 'gumnami sant' or a man with a lost name - the words read like a disclaimer on someone requesting anonymity, as if saying, "Sorry, he did not wish to be known".

A farmer working in the field nearby, however, is quick to give back the man his name. "That is Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose", he says. The farmer, like many people in Faizabad, needs no convincing on the man cremated here.

Faizabad had known Bhagwanji since his days as a lodger at Rambhawan in 1983. His landlord of two years, Gurubasant Singh, who retired as a transport officer, remembers the day when Dr RP Mishra (Bhagawanji's follower since 1975) walked in and booked the two room annexe of the house. The doctor said the rooms were for his grandfather and his caretakers, a woman called Sarswati Devi and her son Rajkumar Misra. "He is a religious man. He stays in his room and worships all the time. He never appears before anyone," the doctor told him.

Apparently, Bhagwanji's reputation had not preceded him to Faizabad. Earlier, the fear of controversy and poverty had driven him from Neemsar to Basti and then on to Ayodhya. He did not even have the money to pay for his rent. (A neighbour in Ayodhya recalls the days when Bhagwanji hurt himself and lay unattended withering in pain in a run-down house with no electricity and a swarm of mosquitoes to keep him company through the summer nights.)

Bhagwanji was also very secretive in his ways... apparently, Rambhawan like all other places where he stayed, had been carefully chosen to preserve the secrecy he wanted. His rooms at Rambhawan were to the back of the main house and could be reached through a narrow lane next to the main pathway. Another passage led from the rooms through the backyard and towards the cantonment. When visitors came calling (people say military, civil and police officials used to visit him for long hours during the night), they could walk in without being noticed.

Though Singh was the host for two years, he never met Bhagwanji face-to-face. "I heard him speak ...His voice was heavy and crisp, like that of a military general. It reminded me of the actor, Sohrab Modi…" Singh says. "But he was always behind a curtain."

Of course, to Singh and many others, the veil of secrecy was too thick, and not until Bhagwanji's death was it lifted. Today, as the truth emerges, Singh prepares for the moment his house is declared a national monument.

By the time Bhagwanji moved to Faizabad, he was 86 years old and was in need of regular medical attention. Dr T Banerjee, his son Dr Priyabrat Banerjee, besides Dr Mishra, were always there for him.

Dr Priyabrat Banerjee who deposed before the Mukherjee Commission recalls the day in 1975 when Saraswati Devi came to their clinic and asked his father to accompany her to "attend to the baba".

"My father was a changed man when he returned after the meeting… he was perplexed and excited!" Both Banerjee senior and his wife Pushpa had seen Netaji in the 1930s… there was no mistaking their man.

After his father died in 1983, Dr Priyabrat Banerjee became the attendant doctor. He recalls his first meeting with the Bhagwanji: "My heart throbbed like a pump when I saw him. He was fair, almost bald and had a long beard. There was something in his gaze… I could not even look into his eyes."

Not everyone was, however, lucky to see his face. Ramji Pandey, who used to massage him, remembers how Bhagwanji used to cover his face with a monkey cap. Cuts on the Bhagwanji's abdomen, however, did not escape the masseur's notice.

Another man recalls how Bhagwanji described to his wife a visit to Stuttgart in Germany. It, of course, left the man wondering how a penniless hermit, who by the look of it had not even strayed beyond Uttar Pradesh, could talk so knowledgeably about a city in a foreign country.

Many such stories on Bhagwanji do round in Faizabad today. In fact, after his death in 1985, the baba's stories were splashed on the first pages of many local newspapers. The news even travelled to Parliament, although soon after - and quite strangely - the stories got spiked.

Indeed, many questions were asked after his death, and the one big question centered on the manner in which he was cremated. In fact, after his death on September 16, people were physically prevented from entering the house by his followers. Even Gurubasant was stopped at the door.

The body was kept in the house for two days after which his confidants draped his body in a tricolour and took his body in a van to Guptar Ghat. There, on a piece of public land, his body was put to the flames.

People who attended the cremation say it drizzled when the pyre was lit.

Bose's brother, aides among Bhagwanji's informants

By Anuj Dhar

Among those to surface in Bhagwanji's list of associates included Netaji's elder brother Suresh Bose, besides others of Netaji's circle.

Some of the important ones were Trailokya Nath Chakravarty, Sunil Das, Anil Das and Ashutosh Kali. In letters, testimonies, messages and private conversation, all of them had indicated who Bhagwanji was truly.

An inference can also be drawn from former West Bengal Chief Minister Prafulla Ghosh's and former West Bengal Attorney General Ajit Dutt's dispatches to him.

Ghosh wrote to Bhagwanji: "…the Haripura Session leading to the Wellington Square happenings - if they had not happened, life would have taken a different turn." Netaji had become Congress president in Haripura and had resigned at Wellington Square Session, a year later.

Dutt, on the other hand, had sent a parcel to Bhagwanji. Though its contents are not known, the parcel cover (with Dutt's name on it) was found from the latter's belongings preserved in the Faizabad treasury.

(Like the Chief Minister, Dutt, too had no reason other than the obvious to associate himself with Bhagwanji.)

Some of the other indicators thrown by Netaji's associates are:

Sunil Das: He was among the closest associates of Netaji. He told the Khosla Commission during his September 6, 1972 deposition: "How can I mistake his (Subhas') identity… I believe that Netaji is still alive." On why Netaji is not appearing, Das said, "I have no competence to go into it".

He also said that Leela Roy was sure that Netaji lived on…, but said that the "crucibles of secret revolutionary politics" forbade him from disclosing what seniors had told him.

Eight years back, Das had sent a report to Bhagwanji on Surendra Mohan Ghosh, an MP who had probed the Shoulmari affair on Pandit Nehru's order. (It was rumored that Shoulmari Baba was Subhas.)

Trailokya Nath Chakravarty: He knew Netaji since the '20s. For his revolutionary activities, he was sent to jail for 30 years, during which he spent an interim with Netaji in Mandalay Jail. In a letter hesent to Bhagwanji, he writes of an association with an unnamed person with whom he "entered Mandalay Jail". He also writes that the people of Bangladesh and he are waiting for the person… (Trailokya Nath was in East Pakistan and he helped Sheikh Mujib-ur-Rehman during the 1971 Bangladesh war.)

Anil Das: In his letter to Bhagwanji, he reminds about his work before and after the 'death' of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. He also writes about his visit to Neemsar on pisima's (Leela Roy) request to seek Bhagwanji's orders. Leela Roy post-scripts the letter, by vouching for Das: He is a "a dedicated, upright and idealistic worker". Another letter shows that Bhagwanji gave Anil Das access to him.

Aushtosh Kali: In his letter to Bhagwanji, this revolutionary says he found out about the latter from Dr Pabitra Mohan Roy. Kali says, though old, he is determined to carry out orders. He is concerned about Bhagwanji's security and promises to maintain secrecy. "Any danger to your existence… can result in a great disaster as well as an immense damage to the entire nation."

Suresh Bose: His liaison with Bhagwanji became known in 1985. His daughter Lalita Bose was present when Bhagwanji's belongings were being examined after his death. She identified the original summons from Khosla Commission that was meant for her father. She also identified her father's handwriting on papers which had statements of some important witnesses before the Commission. (One revolutionary also told HindustanTimes.com that in the '60s, Suresh Bose also the member of Shahnawaz Commission on Netaji Mystery asked him to visit Bhagwanji in Neemsar & Suresh Bose earlier deserted Shahnawaz Commission accusing it of partiality under then Prime Minister Nehru's order & submitted a Dissentient Report.)

As a practice, most of the letters written to Bhagwanji were vetted, verified and cleared by Leela Roy and Dr Pabitra Mohan Roy before forwarding. Also, no direct reference to Netaji was allowed in any of the letters. (This was part of a security drill that Bhagwanji insisted.)

The fact that Leela Roy and Dr Pabitra Mohan Roy supported the drill only strengthens the contention that Bhagwanji was Netaji in disguise.

Dissentient Report of Suresh Bose against Shahnawaz Commission

I (Suresh Bose) ... appeal to my esteemed countrymen not to accept the reports submitted by my learned colleagues or by my humble self, but to make a demand to our Government to place at their disposal the whole of the evidence that was made available to the (Shah Nawaz) Committee and ... form their opinion after a careful perusal and consideration of the same, and, if the general opinion be that the aircraft accident did not take place, and that Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose did not die, as alleged, to demand an impeachment of all those, who have taken part in this nefarious game.

Why this enquiry?

It would be desirable and necessary to state in this connection that the Prime Minister, in reply to questions put in the Parliament by Shri H. V. Kamath, was pleased to state, "I have no doubt in my mind - I did not have it then" (in the Parliament on 5-3-1952) "and I have no doubt today of the fact of Netaji Sub has Chandra Bose\\'s death" - "I have said that the question of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose\\'s death, is, I think, settled beyond doubt. There can be no enquiry about that".

The opinion of the Prime Minister and evidently that of his Government as conveyed in these categorical statements of his, was apparently confirmed by the Chairman of this Committee as his opinion also, in his statement made to the Press in Tokyo on the night of the 4th May, 1956, immediately on our arrival at the Airport there and which was reported in some of the Calcutta newspapers on the 6th idem, that, "his mission was mainly to interview people, who might offer direct evidence on Shri Bose\\'s death". So, the admission of the Chairman exists and that in an initial stage of this enquiry, that his mission was to interview only those persons, who might offer direct evidence on Netaji\\'s death, so as to enable him to confirm his death, which was already the confirmed opinion of the Government and that he had no intention whatsoever of interviewing others, who would be expected to depose contrarily or to take the trouble to ascertain whether Netaji did not die. In view of this, it could almost be presumed that, whether the evidence recorded during the course of this enquiry, justified coming to the finding that the plane crashed or not or whether Netaji died or not, the Chairman appears to have made up his mind to conclude that the plane crashed and that Netaji died as a result of the same. As it appears that the intention of the Government for holding this enquiry was only to confirm Netaji\\'s death, which was already the confirmed opinion of the Prime Minister and his Government, one fails to understand what the necessity was for obtaining the same opinion again and for spending so much public money for it.

In view of the definite statement recorded above, that, "There can be no enquiry about that", made by a person of the rank and stature of the Prime Minister of India, a question would forthwith arise, "Then why was this enquiry held?" The only simple answer to this would naturally be that there must have been a pressing necessity that compelled the ordering of this enquiry. It appears, that from all that has transpired during the pendency of this enquiry, that, after getting Netaji\\'s death confirmed by this Committee, the ultimate object of the Government is to bring those "ashes" from Tokyo, for reasons best known to the sponsors of this Committee.

Terms of reference

Now to come to the subject-matter of this enquiry, it would be necessary, in the first instance, to consider the TERMS of REFERENCE, which are as follows: "To enquire into and to report to the Government of India on the circumstances concerning the departure of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose from Bangkok about the 16th August, 1945, his alleged death as result of an aircraft accident and subsequent developments connected therewith." The points necessary to be considered may, therefore, be classified as follows:

I. CIRCUMSTANCES CONCERNING THE DEPARTURE, which may be subdivided into, (a) CIRCUMSTANCES and (b) DEPARTURE.

II. ALLEGED DEATH AS A RESULT OF AN AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT. In this connection, it may be said that the wording of the "Terms of Reference" is such as to give the impression that the aircraft accident has been accepted as a settled fact. In my humble opinion, it should not be so, as the truth or otherwise of this point is an important subject-matter for decision in this enquiry. The points that may arise subsequent to this alleged accident, hinge to a great extent on the finding on this point. So, before making a decision on this crucial point, it would be indispensably necessary to consider carefully, the whole of the evidence on all the other connected points. If after such careful consideration, the finding be that the aircraft accident did not take place, then only would that finding be a very definite, conclusive and irrevocable one. With such a finding the remaining subject-matter of this enquiry would automatically simplify be itself considerably. Therefore, it has got to be decided first, (a) as to whether the aircraft accident took place or not, and then, (b) if it be held, that such accident did not take place, whether the remaining evidence on record would justify and confirm that finding, and (c) that if it be held, on the contrary, that such accident did take place, then it has got to be decided further, whether, (d) death took place, or, (e) death did not take place.

III. SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS CONNECTED THEREWITH

The points to be considered here, depend, mainly, on the findings on points II (a), (b), (c), (d) & (e) above.

If according to point II (b), the definite finding be that the aircraft accident did not take place, then it would automatically follow that Netaji did not die. The subsequent developments arising there-from would therefore, be as to where Netaji went after leaving Saigon. As no steps were taken for making enquiries on these lines, it would suffice to say here that, as it has been held that the aircraft accident did not take place, so Netaji did not die and there is no knowledge of his subsequent whereabouts.

If, however, according to II (c), it be held that aircraft accident took place, then such accident may or may not have caused death to Netaji, and so the next finding would be in accordance with either II (b) or II (e). If the finding be in accordance with II (e), viz., that Netaji did not die, then the subsequent developments arising therefrom, would more or less, be similar to those of II (b) stated above.

If, however, the finding be in accordance with II(d), viz., that Netaji died as a result of that aircraft accident, then the subsequent developments would not only be as to how his body was disposed of, but it would also be very important and necessary to account for the baggage, including treasure, he was carrying, the dress he was wearing, the articles he was wearing or carrying on his person, e.g., his wrist watch, his spectacles, his rings, fountain pen, cigarette case, cigarette lighter, religious books, Gita & Chandi, purse, magnifying glass, insignia as Supreme Commander, I. N. A. & 1.1. L. badges, etc. and, as stated by Shri Das, witness No. 2, his revolver also.

As regards treasure, it is my humble opinion, that so much of the evidence on record regarding it, as is necessary for the correct decision of the subject-matter of this enquiry, as embodied in the TERMS of REFERENCE and its clarification noted above, may only be taken into consideration for the purposes of this enquiry and as, by itself, it is a very important and complicated matter, it should, if considered necessary, form the subject-matter of a separate enquiry, which should go into full details, commencing from the various sources from and the different descriptions in which they were obtained and ending with the small fraction of the same now in deposit in the National Museum, Rashtrapati Bhawan, New Delhi and after considering carefully all the intermediate stages.

(a) Circumstances

It has been discussed, considered and held under the heading, "NETAJI\\'S PLAN", recorded above, that due to the surrender of the Japanese nation and consequently that of the Indian National Army, formed and organised by Netaji in the Far East, that a plan was agreed upon both by the Japanese as well as by Netaji, that the Japanese would move Netaji to a safe zone, viz., Manchuria, where the Anglo-Americans would no longer be able to arrest him, with the ultimate object of entering Russian territory, where he would continue his struggle for the liberation of India and in pursuance of that plan, Netaji left Bangkok on the morning of 17-8-45 and Saigon the same afternoon with Manchuria, as his destination under the auspices of the Japanese.

With regard to this plan and up to Netaji\\'s departure by a Japanese plane from Saigon on 17-8-45, I believe, there has been more or less unanimity of opinion among all the three members of the Committee. It is, unfortunately, not possible for me to make a definite statement on this matter, as in spite of repeated requests, I was not furnished with the complete draft report of my colleagues and all other important and relevant papers, exhibits, photographs etc., that are on the record and which I am legitimately entitled to be in possession of, for purposes of writing this dissentient report.

All of Netaji\\'s associates in the Far East, who have been examined before us, have stated about Netaji\\'s plan of going to Manchuria, when he parted company from them in a plane from Saigon on 17-8-45 for an "unknown destination." Though Col. Habibur Rahman had admittedly more secret consultations with Netaji than the rest of his Indian brethren there and though he was the only Indian to proceed with him beyond Saigon, there can be no douninew that Netaji\\'s destination was Dairen in Manchuria and he also knew more of Netaji\\'s secrets than any of the others.

The fact that Col. Rahman states that Netaji\\'s destination was Tokyo with intention to return to Singapore soon and that he does not state Dairen or Manchuria or Russia, is enough to suggest, as stated by Shri Dwijendranath Bose and Shri Arabinda Bose, witnesses Nos. 22 & 24 respectively, that he did so intentionally, on the lines he was tutored by Netaji, and not to mention the names of these places, but Tokyo instead, so as to give a wrong scent about Netaji\\'s whereabouts and also to save the Japanese Government from embarrassment and also to narrate the story of the plane crash etc., as was announced by the Japanese in consultation with Netaji and which he did to the best of his abilities. Both of them state that Col. Rahman must have been under strict oath of secrecy to Netaji not to divulge his plans or secrets. They are those nephews of Netaji and two out of his only five confidants, who helped him to get out of Calcutta secretly in January, 1941 and who were also instructed by him to make such statements, which he had tutored them to say and who were also under similar oaths of secrecy to him, regarding his escape from Calcutta.

Netaji started contacting the Russian Ambassador in Tokyo as early as 1944, because he was under the impression at that time that the Japanese would lose the war and he along with them and because he considered Russsia to be a suitable country for carrying on his future struggle for the independence of India. With the gradual lapse of time, this took more definite shape. Shri A. M. Sahay, witness No. 30, and some others have stated that Netaji made attempts at contacting the Chinese Communists through Mr. Ho Chi Minh\\'s party and also the Russians through Mr. M. Shigemitsu, the Foreign Minister of Japan and others. Shri Debnath Das, witness No. 2, also stated that one of Netaji\\'s plans was to go to Yenan, the headquarters of Mr. Mao Tse Tung and that Netaji had asked Shri lyer, witness No. 6, his Minister for Information & Broadcasting, in May, 1945 to write to Mr. Shigemitsu and enquire whether the Japanese Government would contact the Russians on his behalf and provide other facilities to him and to a few members of his staff for going to Russia. A reply to this was received from the Japanese Government in June, 1945.

Shri Das further stated that on more than one occasion, Netaji requested General Isoda, witness No. 35, to continue letting him know the position of the Japanese in Manchuria and North China. Witness No. 5, Col. Pritam Singh, deposed that Netaji had told him that he (Netaji) had contacted the Russians through Mr. Shigemitsu and he wished that he and some of his party should move to Russian territory and operate from there and he also said that the ideology of the Russians was so different from that of the Anglo-Americans, that sooner or later and in about ten years\\' time, they would come to a clash, when it would be an opportune moment for them to go into action again for the independence of India.

All these would go a long way to show and prove that Netaji\\'s plan of going to Russia via Manchuria, after his failure in his armed struggle against the Anglo-Americans in South East Asia, was not a cursory suggestion, but was a carefully-thought-of well-matured plan, which, as a matter of fact, was the only alternative left to him, as he did not want to surrender himself to the Anglo-Americans and thereby be instrumental in not only finishing himself, but also bringing to an end, his only cherished goal in life, viz., the independence of his mother country. He was naturally very sincere in having his plan executed.

It is also proved that though the Japanese Government were in utter distress and confusion, due to their surrender to the Anglo-Americans, they were magnanimous enough "in respecting Mr. Chandra Bose\\'s last wishes" and were also, with all sincerity, giving effect to the same plan, by taking him in a plane to Manchuria and had deputed one of their topmost and renowned generals, who knew that territory well and who, according to Mr. T. Negishi, witness No. 20, was considered to be a key man for negotiations with Russia, with instructions to remain with him there and to help him in crossing over into the adjoining Russian territory. The Japanese Government were keen for the quick execution of their plan and their instructions were, that the plane should make a detour to Dairen in Manchuria, and after dropping only Netaji and General Shidei there, the plane would then come back to Japan and alight the remaining passengers there.

The keenness and sincerity on the part of both the Japanese as well as Netaji for the proper and prompt execution of the plan, naturally gives additional importance to it and as the main idea underlying it, was to remove Netaji to a safe place, so that the Anglo-Americans would not be in a position to get hold of him, it would be a natural sequence for the Japanese to announce that Netaji had died, after they were sure that Netaji was safely lodged in a place that was not under the control of the Anglo-Americans. It will be of interest to mention here, that, according to the statements of Shri Dwijendra Nath Bose and Shri Arabinda Bose, witnesses Nos. 22 and 24 respectively, a similar announcement was made by them, when Netaji secretly left Calcutta in January, 1941 and it was made ten days after his actual departure from Calcutta and after information had been received that he had crossed the Indian frontier and was safe in Afghanistan and beyond the clutches of the British rulers of India.

From the evidence on record on this point and which is practically free from discrepancies, though the statements have been made by persons of different nationalities, it can, therefore, definitely be said that the aforesaid plan has been proved very convincingly and without the shadow of a doubt.

It has been stated earlier that both the British as well as the Americans had made thorough and on-the-spot enquiries under different auspices soon after the surrender of the Japanese and had also tried to arrest Netaji under the Enemy Agents\\' Ordinance and also as he was considered to be an "International War Criminal" and because they doubted the truth of the announcement made by the Japanese that Netaji had died in a plane crash accident and as they considered it to be a hoax and believed that he was alive and was hiding somewhere. Being the victorious party, they had all the facilities and opportunities of making thorough enquiries in all the areas, where they thought Netaji could possibly have been living or hiding.

In one of their reports, it transpires that Netaji wanted to shift a nucleus of his Government to Yunan Province in China and through the Communists there, to get into touch with Soviet Russia. Another report states that in July, 1945, Netaji sought permission to enter U.S.S.R. via Manchuria, with a few selected members of his movement, but the same source contends that there was no need for the Japanese to ask the Russians for Netaji\\'s entry, because he wanted to go to Manchuria, from where he thought he would be able to get into touch with the Russian forces.

The same report also states that it is beyond doubt that Netaji had plans to go underground together with a number of his selected friends. This report contains the final conclusion arrived at as a result of the enquiry, and it is to the effect that in the absence of substantial proof, it is still difficult to state conclusively the fate of Bose. This finding, to say the least, carries great weight and, having been contrary to the expectations of the Anglo-Americans, maximum efforts must have been made by them to find out Netaji\\'s whereabouts and also to arrest him for purposes of taking action against him, as he was not only an arch enemy of theirs, because, being a British Indian subject, he waged war against his King and Emperor, but was also a top-ranking "International War Criminal", against which persons, after the last war, the maximum penalty was generally inflicted. It must have been with great reluctance and sorrow that the British and American enquiring officers were compelled to come to the finding that it was difficult to state conclusively the fate of Netaji Bose, which finding, however, should be considered to carry great weight.

As stated by me above, our enquiry should be considered to be a very perfunctory one, when compared with the numerous all-round careful enquiries made by them and whereas, the intention of my colleagues appears to have been to come to the conclusion "anyhow" that Netaji had died and the places in the Far East visited by the Committee were the bare minimum and had been arranged accordingly, the main intention of the Britishers and the Americans must have been to find him out by all possible means and after getting hold of him, to wreak their vengeance on him.

Besides Netaji and his Adjutant, Col. Rahman, the rest were all Japanese Military Officers and Crew of that military plane. In view of the plan of the Japanese Government to remove Netaji to a safe place and from the clutches of the Anglo-Americans and at the same time to announce that he had died as a result of his plane meeting with an accident, the only version that could be expected from all the Japanese witnesses, regarding Netaji\\'s journey from Saigon onwards, would be the one that would be in keeping with the plan of their Government. My colleagues were of opinion that though these witnesses were at that time military officers and under the control of their Government, now, after a lapse of about eleven years, almost all of them, being in different walks of life as civilians and as Japan is not a totalitarian state, they are no longer under any compulsion or obligation to support their Government. I regret, I am unable to accept this view of my colleagues. These witnesses, apart from their education and respectability, are citizens of Japan, and whose unbounded patriotism is probably unique in the world. They have made statements to different authorities at different times, supporting the aforesaid plan of their Government. As such, I consider it an impossibility for them to go beyond their previously recorded statements and thereby disgrace themselves as well as their own Government, who, after all, had done a magnanimous act by giving succour to their friend and ally, "Mr. Chandra Bose".

Harassment & departure from Delhi

I, therefore, requested him to put me in touch with the officer, whom he had on my request, referred to on the 13th instant for arranging accommodation for my stay in Delhi. I duly took leave of my colleagues and met Shri S. K. Roy, Deputy Secretary, External Affairs, accordingly. I may mention here that when Shri R. S. Chavan, Under Secretary, External Affairs, informed me in his letter dated 16.3.56, that the first sitting of our Committee would be held in Delhi on 29.3.56, he enquired of me at the same time about arranging accommodation for me in Delhi. As during the whole of my 48 days\\' stay in Delhi, I stayed with my daughter in her quarters, arrangement and consequent expenditure by the Government on that score was not necessary, but as on 12.7.56, she had to vacate her quarters suddenly, I had to shift from there at about 10.10 o\\'clock that night and a friend of mine was kind enough to come to my rescue and to give me shelter.

On the morning of the following day, I requested the Chairman to have accommodation arranged for me and regarding which, he was good enough to take action. We were informed the next day, that rooms in Kotah House had been secured and ail three of us went to inspect the same. We were, however, disappointed, as rooms in the hutment and not in the main building had been arranged. I objected to staying in the hutment and told the Chairman that I took this as an insult. I then requested him to arrange for rooms for me in the Imperial Hotel, to which I could legitimately lay claim, as apart from other considerations, I had lived at the Maidens Hotel on my own, only a few years ago, after having failed to get rooms in the Imperial. The Chairman said that nothing could be done that day, as it was about 1.45 P.M. and as it was a Saturday. I told him that the matter was a very urgent one, a I was inconveniencing both my generous friend as well as myself and a Government had maintained telephones in the residences of officers, it i expected that urgent work should be managed therefrom beyond office hours

When we met on the morning of the 16th instant, I learnt from the Chairmai that nothing had been done. I told him that this was the fourth day that w were experiencing inconvenience and so, more interest and quick action shoul be taken in this matter. After that, I met Shri S. K. Roy, stated above, am explained the whole situation to him. He was pleased to reserve room provisionally for me in the Imperial Hotel and said he would confirm the sam before 1 P.M. and inform me accordingly. On my way back to my friend room, I dropped in at the Imperial Hotel, where I received confirmation of th above fact. As there was no news from Shri Roy, I phoned him at about 2.4 P.M. He met me soon after and told me that he would meet me definitel before 4 P.M. and inform me that he had fixed up rooms for me. I told hii distinctly that if he failed to do so by that time, I would be compelled to leav Delhi as I could no longer inconvenience my friend as well as myself and t there is a limit to our endurance. He did not turn up as promised, nor WE there any news from him. When the driver of the External Affairs staff Cc came to enquire from me at what time he would have to come the next da for taking me to the Imperial Hotel, I enquired of him whether he had ar message, written or verbal, from the External Affairs Department or from Sh S. K. Roy. He replied in the negative.

Under such circumstances and with such indifference and callousness on ti part of officers concerned and without any assurance that accommodatic would be arranged for me in the near future, as the Chairman had told me th I could no longer sit with them and as he had not told me that he had arrange any place, where I could sit separately for writing my dissentient report, I w; left with no other alternative but to leave Delhi for Calcutta.

President Radhakrishnan met Netaji in Russia

Gandhiji & Nehru agreed to hand over Subhas to Britain as War Criminal if found

Death in Faizabad - Justice Manoj Kumar Mukherjee Commission: Interrogation4.15 The story relating to death of Netaji in Faizabad originates from the statements (supported by affidavits) filed by Dr. Alokesh Bagchi of Gorakhpur, Shri Ashok Tandon, Shri Shakti Singh and Shri Kailash Nath Jaiswal of Faizabad in response to the statutory Notification issued by this Commission. The common case that has been made out by them in their statements is that after the death of Stalin in March, 1953 Netaji escaped from the then Soviet Russia and after coming to India lived at different places in Uttar Pradesh and lastly at \\'Rambhawan\\' in Faizabad. The detailed particulars of those places and duration of his stay there have been incorporated in their statements. Their further claim is that in September, 1985 he left `Rambhawan\\' for an unknown destination, leaving behind a large number of household articles including his family photos, books, letters and other documents in that house; and the custody of the same was taken by the District Magistrate of Faizabad and kept in the treasury there, following an inventory prepared in terms of the direction given in Writ Petition No. 929 of 1986 filed by his (Netaji\\'s) niece Lalita Bose and two others.

4.15.1 To work out the information furnished through those statements and ascertain the truth thereof the Commission visited Faizabad and inspected all the articles kept in the treasury. On thorough scrutiny of more than 2,600 items lying there the Commission felt that about 700 of them might be relevant for its purpose and accordingly brought them to its office in Kolkata. As some of those letters were sent by different persons from Kolkata, the Commission examined some of them. In view of the claim made by a few of the witnesses examined that the writings in some books and journals found in Rambhawan were those of Netaji, they were sent for examination by handwriting experts. Besides, some teeth found there were sent for DNA test to ascertain whether belonged to Netaji\\'s lineage.

4 15.2 In asserting their claim that Netaji lived at various places in the State of Uttar Pradesh as an ascetic holy man under two different names, viz. Gumnami Baba and Bhagwanji, 31 persons have deposed before this Commission. While according to some of them he died at \\'Rambhawan\\' in Faizabad on September 16, 1985 where he last resided, a few others claimed that he had left Faizabad in that month. Of the deponents, the evidence of the following has to be left out of consideration altogether, as it is either hearsay or based on belief without any substantial material in formation thereof : Dr. Alokesh Bagchi (CW. 17) Shri Viswabandhu Tewari (CW 18), Shri I. B. S3xena (CW 19), Dr. Ramendra Pal (CW. 58) and Shri Kailash Nath Jaiswal (CW 60).

The next sets of persons coming under the above category are three journalists: Shri Ashok Tandon (CW. 33), Dr. Viswambharnath Arora (CW 63) and Sayed Kauser Hussain (CW. 64) as their claim is based on the result of their investigation into the mystery surrounding Gumnami Baba as also the several articles they wrote in their respective newspapers, magazines and books, relying upon the statements made before them by several persons (some of whom have been examined by this Commission).

Another set of witnesses to whose evidence reference has to be made only to be rejected comprises those who have not seen Netaji before August, 1945 but claimed that one \\'Mauni Baba\\' who was also known as Sant Samrat Yogi and who used to live in an Ashram in the district of Sitapur was Netaji. In support of their- claim two of them produced few photographs of Mauni Baba - a bare glance of which shows that they have no resemblance whatsoever with Netaji. The witnesses who fall under this category are Shri Raghuraj Singh Rathore (CW. 20), Baba Bhandari @ Shew Bhagwan (CW.35) and Shri Shyam Narayan Bind (CW. 57). Besides, Col. A.B.Singh (CW. 41), who was formerly with INA and knew Netaji since his INA days, testified that on February 19, 1996 he went to Sitapur and saw Mauni Baba. According to him, he was impressed as Mauni Baba\\'s appearance was similar to that of Netaji. Since it has been found that the photographs of Mauni Baba have no similarity whatsoever with Netaji, the evidence of this witness also cannot be entertained.

4.15.3 Following the exclusion of the evidence of the above witnesses for the reasons aforesaid, the evidence of the remaining witnesses on this issue may now be detailed and discussed.

4.15.4 Dr. P Banerjee (CW 37), who was a resident of Faizabad , stated that in the year 1974/1975 he along with his parents had gone to the residence of a saint at Brahmakund in Ayodhya, as he was given to understand by his father that he was none other than Netaji. Initially, he and his family members were not allowed to see the saint as he used to sit behind a curtain. However, their persuasion yielded result in that the saint talked to them face to face. Their such interaction prompted his parents to say that the saint was none other than Netaji. Since, however, he himself did not assert that the saint was Netaji his evidence in this regard is nothing but hearsay. The other two members of his family who deposed before this Commission were his wife Sm. Rita Banerjee (CW. 65) and his mother-in-law Sm. Bithi Chatterjee (CW 71). Both of them averred that they had seen `Gumnami Baba\\' on several occasions while he was living in Brahmakund during 1975-76, but as the former based her claim on her belief only and the latter stated that though she had seen Netaji in Lucknow in or about the year 1943 she found it difficult to say whether Gumnami Baba was Netaji - their evidence does not assist the Commission in answering this issue.

The next witness on this point is Shri Raj Kumar Shukla (CW 38) whose mother Smt. Saraswati Devi Shukla was the attendant of Bhagwanji (she could not be examined by this Commission as she had already expired) . According to this witness, his mother came in contact with Bhagwanji in 1955-1956 at Singarnagar, Lucknow and she cited with him till his death on September 16,1985 at Ram Bhavan, Faizabad. His evidence discloses that while living with his mother at the places where Bhagwanji resided till his death he saw quite a number of persons of Kolkata visiting Bhagwanji. In detailing their names he gave out that Smt.Lecla Roy, Prof. Samar Guha, Dr.Pabitra Mohan Roy and Shri Amal Roy used to come on January 23 (Netaji\\'s birthday) and during the Durga Puja festival almost every year. His evidence further indicates that the visitors were allowed to talk to Bhagwanji from behind a curtain. As regards the identity of Bhagwanji his evidence is that he heard from his mother that he was Netaji and since then he shared the same belief. Though his evidence does not in any way prove that Bhagwanji was Netaji, it at least proves that quite a number of eminent persons from Kolkata used to visit Bhagwanji.

4.15.5 Next comes some of those people of Kolkata who used to frequently go and meet Bhagwanji/Gumnami Baba wherever he lived during the period from 1963-1983. The first witness in this category is Shri Sunil Krishna Gupta (CW 91). His evidence is that in or about 1963 Shri Suresh Bose (elder brother of Netaji) told him that Netaji was reportedly staying in Naimisharanya in the district of Sitapur in Uttar Pradesh. On getting that news he went to Naimisharanya and met a Sadhu in a temple there. To interact with the Sadhu he stayed there for ten days. Since then he used to go and meet him wherever he resided almost every year on January 23 and during Durga Puja . He addressed that Sadhu as Bhagwanji. According to him, the other frequent visitors were Dr. R.P. Misra, Dr. Pabitra Mohan Roy, who was attached to the secret service of INA, Shri Shiba Prosad Nag and others. He admitted that he had not seen Netaji before August 18, 1945, but averred that after seeing and interacting with Bhagwanji he was convinced that he was none other than Netaji. He next stated that at the instance of Bhagwanji he went to Taihoku to watch the proceedings of Khosla Commission and on return apprised him of all the details thereof. He lastly stated that he maintained a diary in which he recorded the resume of his talks with Bhagwanji.

The other witnesses who fall in this category are: Shri Surajit Dasgupta (CW 94), Shri Jagatjit Dasgupta (CW 96), Shri Tarun Kumar Mukhopadhyay (CW 97) and Shri Bijoy Kumar Nag (CW 98). They also admitted that they had not seen Netaji before August 1945 but asserted that frequent meetings with Bhagwanji led them to conclude that he was Netaji. Like Shri Gupta, they also diarised the talks they had with Bhagwanji. In his testimony Shri Nag, however, further stated that Bhagwanji used to talk about various events of his earlier life including his days in INA from which he was convinced that Bhagwanji was none but Netaji. He also produced before this Commission a book titled \\'Oi Mahamanab Ashey\\' (in two volumes) wherein he has, incorporated what Bhagwanji told him. He also referred to a monthly journal \\'Jayashsree\\', of which he was the editor, where also the same issue was written about.http://missionnetaji.org

Family knew all along that Netaji had not died

I am writing to you ... about a matter which concerns not only the Bose family but the entire people of India. -- Amiya Nath Bose to Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

September 2, 2006That the Bose family has been vindicated by Mukehrjee Commission's inquiry is underscored by the letters Subhas Chandra Bose\\'s nephew Amiya Nath Bose wrote to Jawaharlal Nehru, Narasimha Rao, VP Singh and Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Mission Netaji recently accessed these letters of historical importance, and now they are online.

Son of Netaji's elder brother Sarat Chandra Bose, Amiya Nath Bose, an advocate like his father, had been an MP, Ambassador and was actively associated with the Indian National Army. In late 1930s he spent considerable time with his exiled uncle in Europe.

Amiya Nath's views mirroring the family feelings ran contrary to what has of late been given out by the media savvy wife and children of his kid brother Sisir Bose, who came to control the Netaji Research Bureau (NRB) founded by Amiya in 1950s.

From the last days of Nehru to the fringe of the Vajpayee era, Amiya carried on with the struggle initiated by his father to get out the truth about Netaji's disappearance. A few days before his death in 1996, Amiya warned then Leader of the Opposition Atal Bihari Vajapyee that "the Communists have again captured the Russian Parliament. It is doubtful if President Yeltsin will be re-elected. It is therefore imperative that the investigation (into Netaji's fate) is done before President Yeltsin's term comes to an end."

Amiya pressed that the "the Government of India should be asked to request the Russian Government to provide access to ... relevant KGB files, Army Headquarters files and Soviet Government files." Before Vajpayee could respond to the letter, personally delivered by common friend Prof Samar Guha, Amiya Nath passed away.

Earlier, in 1964 Amiya had futilely tried to make the Nehru Government to hand over the matter to the Chief Justice of India. "I agree with you that something should be done to finalise the question of Netaji's death. But it is not quite clear to me how far it will be proper for me to ask the Chief Justice of India to look into this matter," Prime Minister Nehru had written to him on April 22, 1964.

Amiya\\'s firm disbelief in the Taihoku plane crash theory stemmed from his father who had cross-questioned Col Habibur Rahman, the star witness of the crash. In his letter to Prime Minister VP Singh, Amiya recalled that "in August 1946, General Zaman Kiani, Col Habibur Rahman and Col Gulzara Singh, all top ranking officer of the INA, spent a fortnight at our Woodburn park residence, Col Habibur Rahman accompanied in the same plane from Saigon. Our father Sarat Chandra Bose questioned Col Rahman in detail and rejected his version of the alleged plane crash."

In August 1992, Amiya informed Prime Minister Narasimha Rao what Justice Radha Binode Pal of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East had told his father. "The American judge of the Tribunal showed Dr Pal a copy of the report of the American Intelligence Agency Party, which visited Taihoku in September, 1945. According to the American report there was no air crash at Taihoku Airport in August 1945 and Netaji safely reached Diren in Manchuria (bordering the USSR) on 18 August 1945 (the day of his reported death)." Amiya also referred to some correspondence, which evidently showed that Mahatma Gandhi had information from "either from British or American sources" that Netaji in Russia almost an year after his reported death.

On the Renkoji ashes, Amiya spelt out the family view to Prime Minister VP Singh. "During the lifetime of our youngest uncle late Shailesh Chandra Bose, a statement signed by him and all sons of every one of Netaji's brothers were issued to the press at Calcutta stating that the 'ashes' at Renkoji Temple were not the 'ashes of Netaji'."

Incidentally this letter, signed by brothers Ashoke, Amiya and Subrata, currently a Lok Sabha MP, had been written to ward off an attempt by "certain interested persons" to bring the Renkoji ashes and "foist them on the Indian people as the ashes of Netaji".

Thumbs-up to JMCI; thumbs-down to ATR: Bose family

We wonder whether this (rejection of the Mukherjee Commission report) was done to hide some unsavoury facts from the public or to save the reputation of some well-known personalities, or both.

Statement released by 43 members of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose\\'s family at a press conference in Kolkata on May 26, 2006

We, the overwhelming majority in the Bose family, deeply appreciate the arduous efforts that Mr Justice MK Mukherjee and his team in the Commission have made for seven years to unravel the mysteries surrounding the "death" of Netaji, which was supposed to have occurred in an aircrash at Taipei in August, 1945.

However, we regret that neither the previous National Democratic Alliance (NDA) government nor the present United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government extended their whole-hearted co-operation to the Mukherjee Commission, which was absolutely essential for the success of an enquiry which had vast international dimension.

We admired the way Mr Justice Mukherjee conducted himself in public hearing. Approaching delicate issues in an objective manner, he rigorously sought evidence for any statement made before him. Nobody can question either his competence or his integrity.

The main conclusions that have been drawn by the Commission are:

i) Netaji did not die in the plane crash in August 1945 as alleged and

ii) The ashes in the Renkoji Temple in Japan are not of Netaji.

Mr Justice Mukherjee has provided "clinching evidence" for these conclusions to stop all kinds of controversies on these crucially important issues. It is thus demanded that the Report of the Justice Mukherjee Commission be accepted by the Government of India.

Government of India had rejected the findings of the Commission without giving any explanation. This is an unprecedented act therefore has caused various speculations. We wonder whether this was done to hide some unsavoury facts from the public or to save the reputation of some well-known personalities, or both. Whatever might be reasons for this crass act, we strongly urge the Government to provide a full explanation for its rejection of the Justice Mukherjee Commission\\'s Report at an early date.

The Mystery behind Netaji's INA Treasury by Shamoli Mitra

For decades Indians all over the country have mulled and argued over a mystery that till today maintains its grip over the collective consciousness of the nation. The question that comes up again and again in the minds of Indians is this - Did Netaji really die in the 1945 plane crash? But shocking new developments over the past few months have propelled this question into ever more mysterious realms. Incredibly hard facts have now emerged from Moscow vaults that indicate what Indians had hoped for and suspected all along - that our beloved Netaji , Subhash Chandra Bose did NOT die in the 1945 plane crash as the Government of India appointed inquiry has claimed all along. Netaji was in fact very much alive till at least 1946 one full year after his supposed "death".

So what do these tumultuous revelations mean? The new findings are based on declassified documents in the Russian military archives in Paddolsk, and from the British archives. They were discovered by three researchers-Purabi Ray, Hari Vasudevan and Shobanlal Dutta Gupta-working on the history of communist movement in India.

The plot has thickened even deeper with the admission by these researchers that they have been receiving threatening calls from unidentified persons asking them to suspend all further inquiries and end the government-funded research. Fear for security led the work on the project to be stopped shortly, around the middle of this year. The researchers refused to speak to the press on the grounds that they would first have to depose their discoveries before the Mukherjee commission, the third inquiry panel appointed by the Indian government so far) before giving out any details.

What is clear however is that the Russian archives had yielded two precious documents. The first concerned a discussion that Joseph Stalin had with his defense minister Voroschilov and foreign affairs minister Molotov in 1946.

The second was a report filed by a Soviet field agent stationed in India, also in 1946.The first document quotes Stalin and others discussing plans for the communist movement in India and mentions the role of Bose. In addition records available from British archives (under the 'declassification after 30 years' rule) show that on August 17, 1945, (the plane crash was reported the next day), Bose had expressed a keen desire to reach Soviet Union to continue the struggle against the British. One more British archive document also states that the entire theory of the plane crash, in Taihuku (Japan), was pre-planned and contrived. In fact as late as December 20, 1945 , a Japanese newspaper even reported that Bose was on his way to the Soviet Union and passed through Tokyo.

Adding to the clouds of confusion are the details indicating that just a few days before Stalin and his colleagues discussed Bose, a Soviet agent named V G Sayadyants who was based in Mumbai reported home that "the Soviet Union cannot possibly work with either Nehru or Gandhi," and that the Communist movement in India "is in a disarray." He also concluded that "Bose is the only hope for Soviet Russia," in his report.

The two death reports-one from MI2 (a wing of British military intelligence) and the other from the British embassy in Japan served as the primary evidence of the story that Bose had died of severe burns in the plane crash. But both of these reports have been discovered to contain major discrepancies. While the British embassy report claimed to have clearly identified Bose's body, the MI2 report was "not sure."

On November 23, the Mukherjee Commission held a hearing where the researchers including Professor Purobi Roy were asked to submit a list of documents and with their respective translations before the Commission. But in a puzzling development the Commission disclosed that the Union Home Ministry by an affidavit claimed privilege under the Sections 123 and 124 of the Evidence Act and Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India on the files. Justice Manoj K. Mukherjee told reporters that "The files on the urn allegedly containing Netaji's ashes in Renkoji Temple and the Union Government's decision to award Bose the Bharat Ratna, could not be given to the Commission on grounds that making them public would be a threat to the nation's security!".

Justice Mukherjee also made the surprising observation that "We will take up the issue during the next hearing if the Union Home Ministry can claim privilege on these files. I don't say they are not doing anything, but whatever they are doing is not adequate". When asked if this indicated an uncertain future for the Commission, Justice Mukherjee shot back saying: ''It's not for me to pass comments." Earlier Justice Mukherjee had informed the audience that the Special Branch of the Calcutta Police had sent incorrect information regarding the files it was asked to submit.

A status report circulated among the audience said that the Prime Minister's Office sought 15 more days time to file a consolidated affidavit covering all the points mentioned in the proceedings of the Commission. The status report also noted that no affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Cabinet Secretariat, the National Archives of India, and Research and Analysis Wing. However, among other documents, the National Archives of India informed the Commission in a letter dated 24.10.2000 that they had received 46 xerox pages on Subhash Chandra Bose from the department of Culture, Government of India, though the Embassy of India in Moscow on 15 May1991.

One is forced to ask what is about the Netaji files that is causing the government to cite endangerment of the nation's security as an excuse to stop the documents from becoming public. Could the BJP government be feeling the heat to hide the details of what really happened to Netaj1? There is no doubt plenty of resistance from the Congress which does not want the nation to know Jawaharlal Nehru's actions and role in betraying Netaji.

The previous two Commissions that were supposed to unearth the details about Netaji were both appointed by the Congress government. These were the Shah Nawaz Committee or the Khosla Commission. The Government under Mrs. Gandhi told Khosla Commission that many confidential files of Nehru connected with the reports about Netaji were either missing or destroyed. These files were dealt with by the personal secretary of Pandit Nehru - Mohammad Yunus .

It had also been discovered that the British intelligence team informed their Government that Pandit Nehru had "received a secret communication from Bose". This report was confirmed by a witness, Shri Shyamlal Jain of Meerut, while he deposed before Khosla Commission. In 1945-46, Shri Jain was working as a confidential steno of Asaf Ali who was Secretary to the INA Defense Committee with Bhulabhai Desai as its Chairman and Pandit Nehru as one of its prominent members. This confidential steno of the INA Defense Committee, in the course of his deposition, made a shocking revelation about Nehru's attitude toward Netaji.

Shri Jain had told the Khosla Commission:

"I solemnly affirm and state on oath that one evening (the date may be Dec. 26 or 27, 1945) I was called by Shri Jawaharlal Nehru on telephone to come to the residence of Shri Asaf Ali with a typewriter as he had a lot of work to be typed by me, which I complied. After getting some papers typed by me, Shri Jawaharlal Nehru drew out a paper from the pocket of his achkan and asked me to make four copies of it for him. The said paper was a hand-written matter and was somewhat difficult to read. Now, what was written on that paper, I am trying to reproduce from my memory:"

"Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose proceeding by aeroplane from Saigon arrived today, August 23, 1945 at Dairen (Manchuria) at 1:30 afternoon. The said plane was a Japanese bomber plane. It was full of gold in the shape of bars, ornaments and jewelry. Netaji carried two attache cases, one in each hand. On alighting from the plane, Netaji took tea with bananas. When Netaji finished tea, he along with four others, out of which one was a Japanese named General Shidei (and others have lapsed from memory), took their seats in a jeep standing nearby. The said jeep proceeded toward Russian territory. After about 3 hours the said jeep returned and informed the pilot of the plane who flew back to Tokyo."

"After handing over the said paper to me for typing, Shri Jawaharlal Nehru went to Mr. Asaf Ali and remained busy in conversation with him for 10 or 15 minutes...I could not complete the work, because the name of the writer on that letter was not readable, and I kept waiting for Shri Jawaharlal to come and tell me the name. In the meantime, I went through the letter several times and that is all that I could remember to the present day. Shri Jawaharlal could not discern the name of the writer and asked me to pull out the papers and hand them over as they were."I solemnly affirm and state on oath that thereafter Shri Jawaharlal Nehru gave me four papers from his writing pad to make four copies of a letter, which he would dictate to me on typewriter, which I also complied. The contents of the letter, as far as I could remember, were as follows:

Dear Mr. Attlee:

I understand from a reliable source that Subhas Chandra Bose, your war criminal, has been allowed to enter Russian territory by Stalin. This is a clear treachery and betrayal of faith by the Russians. As Russia has been an ally of the British-Americans, it should not have been done. Please take note of it and do what you consider proper and fit.

Yours sincerely, Jawaharlal Nehru.

When these shocking revelations were revealed by MP Samar Guha, they were met with incredulity and anger and Mr. Guha had been lambasted as a hysterical conspiracy theorist who was on a witch hunt against the Gandhi family. But now we see that subsequent discoveries have buttressed Mr. Guha's accusations and point to the shocking role of Pandit Nehru in this sordid mess. Below are some of the hard-hitting revelations by Mr. Guha which are now clearly augmented by documentary evidence.

1)British Intelligence affirmed that Pandit Nehru received a secret communication from Netaji and Jain confirmed it further without knowing anything about this secret report.

2)Col. Tada, one of the principal architects of Netaji's escape plan confided to S.A. Iyer in 1951 that the Japanese agreed to make necessary arrangements to convey Netaji to Russian territory across the border of Manchuria.

3)Neither the Government Counsel appearing before the Inquiry Commission, nor Mr. Khosla either challenged or refuted the veracity of Jain's testimony.

4)Most of the secret files about Netaji, that were maintained by Pandit Nehru himself as "P.M.'s special" files, one of which included all communications connected with INA Defense Committee, were reported by the Government as "either missing or destroyed". It will not be easy to presume that Netaji's communication to Nehru and a copy of Nehru's letter to Attlee have also been destroyed.

5)Late Amritlal Seth, former editor of the Gujarati Daily Janmabhumi, who accompanied Nehru during his visit to Singapore told late Sarat Chandra Bose immediately after his return from Singapore that Panditji was warned by the British Admiral that, according to his report, 'Bose' did not die in the alleged air crash and if Nehru played up too high with the legends of Bose and demands for re-absorption of the INA in the Indian Army, he would be taking the risk of presenting India on a platter to Bose when he reappeared.

The report by Amritlal Seth is corroborated by two facts. On arrival at Singapore Pandit Nehru was given a rousing reception by the INA there, when Panditji agreed to their request to place a wreath on the INA Martyr Monument, which was demolished under orders from Mountbatten immediately after British re-occupation of Singapore.

Strangely, next day, Nehru refused to attend the INA Martyr Memorial ceremony organized at Singapore. About three decades later, Mountbatten boastfully stated in the 'Nehru Oration' speech that Nehru acted very compliantly on his advice regarding the treatment about the INA. After his return from Singapore, Nehru never uttered a word about Netaji for over a decade even after he became the Prime Minister of India.

6)Till the 1950's, AIR was instructed not to cover any special talk on Netaji or broadcast any news about Netaji's birthday, exceeding a few minutes. All army barracks were prohibited from displaying any portrait of Netaji and this ban-order continued for years even after withdrawal of the British Power.

7)After coming to power, Pandit Nehru had received all the secret British reports which informed the Wavell Government that Bose reached Russia, but as Prime Minister of India he never inquired publicly about these reports from the Russian Government. Even more suspicious is the fact that Pandit Nehru consistently opposed any demands for full-fledged judicial inquiry about the Netaji mystery and appointed the Shah Nawaz Committee primarily as a smokescreen to scuttle the move for a non-official inquiry about Netaji under the chairmanship of Dr. Radha Benode Pal.

This incredible and shocking conspiracy to hide the circumstances and conditions surrounding Netaji's disappearance and the subsequent falsified rumour of his death are of significant importance to the Indian people. The annals of Indian history and the conscience of the nation demands that the facts concerning this mystery be revealed to the public. The BJP government must show the courage and fortitude to overcome political compulsions and point the finger at the real culprits. Only then can the ghost of lost opportunities and the regret of having lost their most beloved leader too soon, be put to rest in the minds of the Indian people.Where was wealth of Azad Hind Bank?By Premendra Agrawal

Threats to ResearchersDid Netaji really die in the 1945 plane crash? Incredibly hard facts have now emerged from Moscow vaults. Netaji was in fact very much alive till at least 1946 one full year after his supposed "death". Russian archives had yielded two precious documents. The first concerned a discussion that Joseph Stalin had with his defense minister Voroschilov and foreign affairs minister Molotov in 1946. The second was a report filed by a Soviet field agent stationed in India, also in 1946.

One more British archive document also states that the entire theory of the plane crash, in Taihuku (Japan), was pre-planned and contrived. In fact as late as December 20, 1945, a Japanese newspaper even reported that Bose was on his way to the Soviet Union and passed through Tokyo.

Nehru betrays NetajiBritish Prime Minister Clements Attlee decided ‘Let him remain where he (Subhash C. Bose) is now’. This decision was taken in October 1945. It clearly indicates that he was alive even in Oct 1945.

Netaji was reported to be alive even after 1945 by the British intelligence from Tehran and Kabul quoting the Russian embassy officials. This was even stated in the Shah Nawaz Commission report (File No. 10/ Mis/ INA-pp 38, 39).

In 1946, Gallacher, a British Communist Party worker publicly criticised the then Irish President D’ Valera for welcoming Netaji in Doublin! D’ Valera didn’t deny this. He visited India after 1946 and even commented publicly ‘I expected to meet Bose here’!

The British intelligence has reported that Nehru knew where Netaji was. Nehru took the Foreign Affairs portfolio himself and appointed none other than own sister, Vijayalakshmi Pandit as the ambassador to Russia!

After her term was over, Dr S. Radhakrishnan became the representative to Russia. Dr Saroj Das of Calcutta University conveyed to his friend historian, Dr R.C. Muzumdar that Radhakrishnan had told him that Netaji was in Russia.

Former Indian ambassador Dr Satyanarayana Sinha once met Goga, the son of Abani Mukherjee, a revolutionary who went to Russian as a communist party worker; told him that his father and Netaji were prisoners in adjacent cells in Siberia. He also told Sinha that Netaji had assumed the name ‘Khilsai Malang’ there.

The most shocking of all information it contained was that Netaji had posted a letter from Russia to Nehru, telling that he wished to come back and he also asked Nehru to make amendments for his come back!

One may confirm these from the parliamentary records released since 3rd August 1977; and the files published by the British government.

As reported in every newspaper at that time, daughter of Stalin, Ms. Swetlana said in Delhi that Netaji was in Siberia’s Yarkutsk jail. She also gave the Barrack No.

Why Mukherjee Commission Report rejected?

Congress does not want the nation to know Jawaharlal Nehru's actions and role in betraying Netaji. The previous two Commissions: Shah Nawaz Committee and the Khosla Commission were appointed by the Congress government. For bringing truth BJP let NDA Govt. appointed Mukherjee Commission.

“I saw Netaji alive after his alleged plane crash” is disclosed by Capt Abbas Ali, an old INA freedom fighter.

“It was ‘unbelievable’ that Netaji died in an air crash” said by Suresh Chandra Bose elder brother of Subhash C.Bose. He deposing before the Khosla Commission charged Mr Shah Nawaz Khan with "playing Netaji false."

Deposing before the Khosla Commission, Dr Satyanarayan Sinha said Colonel Habibur Rehman had confessed to him at Patna in 1946 that he had had told a lie when he said that Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose died in a plane crash in Taipeh on August 18, 1945.

Killing of Netaji files by Congress Governments

Most of the secret files about Netaji, that were maintained by Pandit Nehru himself as "P.M.'s special" files, one of which included all communications connected with INA Defense Committee, were reported by the Indira Gandhi Government as "either missing or destroyed". It will not be easy to presume that Netaji's communication to Nehru and a copy of Nehru's letter to Attlee have also been destroyed. These files were dealt with by the personal secretary of Pt Nehru - Mohammad Yunus.

Colonel TadaCol. Tada, one of the principal architects of Netaji's escape plan confided to S.A. Iyer in 1951 that the Japanese agreed to make necessary arrangements to convey Netaji to Russian territory across the border of Manchuria.

Late Amritlal Seth, editor ‘Janmabhumi’

Late Amritlal Seth, former editor of the Gujarati Daily Janmabhumi, who accompanied Nehru during his visit to Singapore told late Sarat Chandra Bose immediately after his return from Singapore that Panditji was warned by the British Admiral that, according to his report, 'Bose' did not die in the alleged air crash and if Nehru played up too high with the legends of Bose and demands for re-absorption of the INA (Azad Hind Fauz) in the Indian Army, he would be taking the risk of presenting India on a platter to Bose when he reappeared.

Journey of Gold-Diamond loaded Trunks

What happened after August 18 remains shrouded in mystery. While conducting her research in Moscow and England Professor Purabi Roy pursued a war time major of MI5 who had snooped around Bose. Roy met the agent in Oxford and he told her that a huge amount of 'INA money' was handed over to Lord Mountbatten and a senior Congress leader in Singapore, and that is the key to Bose's disappearance (and the subsequent reluctance to unravel the mystery) could be solved to a great extent by ascertaining the route that the funds travelled." Read full story at: http://www.missionnetaji.org/newsite/page/treasure_treachery.html

“10 metric tons of bullion means two-hundred wooden crates, each containing four 12.5kg gold bars, were loaded onto a Mercedes wheat truck with just one driver for the furtive drive from Baghdad to Amman, Jordan passing through airports in India, London and Hong Kong before being reprocessed at Perth Mint and sold off in small bars and coins.”

Azad Hind Bank

Captain Wadhera sought to know the whereabouts of the huge wealth that was collected by Netaji for the freedom struggle and deposited in the Azad Hind Bank, which was specially opened to prevent misuse of cash and ornaments donated by Indians to strengthen the hands of the INA in its freedom struggle.

Recalling the events from his INA days, Captain Wadhera disclosed that a big rally was organized by the Indian Independence League at Singapore to welcome Netaji. “As the huge gathering of Indians in Singapore garlanded Netaji, nearly a truckload of garlands accumulated there”, he said.

After thanking the gathering, Netaji announced that he would like to auction the garlands that had been put around his neck.

“The bid started with Rs 1 lakh (in 1943 it was more than rupees fifty lakh of today). The first garland was auctioned for Rs 1 crore and 3 lakh, which was purchased by a Muslim industrialist of Malaya, Habibur Rehman. Later he volunteered his services to join the movement. The women offered their valuables and gold ornaments. Total collections at this auction were about Rs 25 crore”, Captain Wadhera nostalgically recalls”.

Mukherjee Commission submitted its report on November 8, 2005The government sat on it for six months, then tabled it in Parliament on May 17, 2006, when it also rejected the report. Why such late in tabling the report?

Basically, the commission’s findings are the following:

(1). Netaji did not die in the August 1945 Taipei plane crash as reported.

(2) The ashes at Tokyo’s Renkoji temple are not his.

(3) The story of the crash was a trick to help him escape, and the Japanese and Taiwanese governments knew about it.

(4) The Indian government suppressed a report by the Taiwanese government which stated this in 1956.

THOSE WHO think that Gumnami Baba was actually Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose may feel delighted to know that UP Government has 24 big boxes that contain Gumnami Baba’s personal belongings. All these 24 boxes are secured under double locks put by Faizabad Treasury. The controversy that roseafter Baba’s death that he was actually Netaji had galvanized the then administration to take possession of all the articles of personal use of Baba’s into its custody. The articles in the boxes include round frame spectacles, Belgian typewriters, many newspapers of pre-independence and post-independence time with Baba’s comments scribbled on them, boxes full of books of international relevance, several books gifted by ‘sister’, cigars from Germany and Italy, and some huge-size family photographs.

Soon after Baba’s death in 1985, a Bengali woman came to Faizabad to claim the articles as Netaji’s successor. However, the landlord of Shakti Bhawan, the secret dwelling place of Baba, refused to hand over the articles to her. And after this the version that Baba was actually Netaji spread and grew strong.

Later, all the articles were handed over to the then administration. Following this the woman filed a case in Calcutta HC, and since then all the articles was declared the property of Calcutta HC.

In 1999, the Centre constituted Mukherjee Commission, and taking the version seriously, the Commission’s officers visited Faizabad and wanted to have a look of the articles. However, they were refused that without court’s permission no one will be allowed to do so. HC permitted the commission members to have a look at the articles. It is alleged that when the members saw and examined the articles, some of them touched those articles to their head as mark of reverence.

All the articles are kept properly under double lock by Faizabad Treasuryat the Shakti Bhawan itself.

It is a memorandum for "Chief, ... (censored) ..." and the sender is Deputy Director of Security. The subject has been blacked out but Subhas Bose's name appears in ink. The document reads as follows:

1. Reference is made to your telephonic request of 19 February 1964 that the Subject be interviewed by a representative of this office.

2. Attached is the report of the interview conducted on 27 February 1964 at Washington D C. No further action will be taken in this matter unless requested by you.

The document carries the following attachments:

"At Washington D C :

On February 26, 1964 at approximately 1345 hours, ...(censored)...was interviewed...(censored)...? ...(censored)... relate a story concerning the possible return of one Subas (or Subhas) Chandra Bose. This individual is a former deposed president of the Indian National Congress, 1938-39, and is believed to have died in an airplane crash after the war. However, there now exists a strong possibility that BOSE is leading the religious group undermining the current Nehru Government."

"Subject desired that his story be presented to the proper persons in the agency for evaluation and to alert those concerned of the previously mentioned possibility. Subject also advised the [sic]...(censored)... was a former member of the British Counter Intelligence Corps and could provide some factual information regarding BOSE and his operations with the Indian National Army during World War II.

"SUBJECT was dressed neatly in a designer suit and his conversation were intelligent. He did not appear to be alarmed or emotional about his story and was merely offering it as a guide to the Central Intelligence Agency for whatever action they deemed advisable".http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/Netaji/ciamore.htm